Cub barrels.

[Twinshock200]

Once again I agree with George about the emails, I don't want to be the coordinator of this project at the moment because I am spending too much time out of the country, but its interesting that I have already had a few responses offering their opinions.

If we are to do this properly and get a favourable result out of all this there are a few things we need to start with;

1. Firstly we need to find out the cut off date for submissions to the 2014 MOMS and work within that.

2. We need to agree on the purpose/objective of what we are submitting

3. We need to put figures and details of why we are doing this, ie. no growth in the grade in 30 years, too much confusion over the rules etc etc.

4. Identify the scope of the survey we carry out on riders opinions, ie, 40 riders, all agreed change was needed etc etc.

5. Put forward proposals of what we want changed or introduced

6. Following introduction of the proposed changes, monitor the results state by state and present the facts, good or bad, to the Classic trials community
and all the committees.

Those are my suggestions gents, it won't be an easy road for someone to coordinate this and maybe we need somebody totally impartial or do we need someone who is or was close to the Classic scene, I can think of a couple of guys but they need computer skills.
Again we musn't let this develop into a dogfight if we decide to do it in a new topic on this website but personally I believe it should be done in a private forum if this is available on this website.
Cheers
Galps

[David Lahey]

Yes, we can do it using a new thread on this forum. I'm not an Administrator, but as a Moderator, I have permission to delete posts or parts of posts if there is a good reason, so we should be able to avoid a lot of the aggro that might develop otherwise.
If you go along with this idea, please say so and I will start a suitable thread.
To make sure I'm thinking along the right lines, are we initially trying to make a list of people who have an interest in improving the rules for eligibility for Classic Trials bikes at MA events?

[David Lahey]

Sorry Roger I wrote my post without seeing your latest post, but my offer remains to Moderate a string for the purpose of collecting interested parties

[Twinshock200]

That would be really good David and thanks for the offer, we need all interested parties agreeing to this.
I think we could actually do the survey through the clubs which should get to all interested parties.

The best way to get results which can be offered as facts to support our submission would be to put together a questionaire that interested parties fill in and return to their club secretary.
Sounds pedantic but we have time to do this properly this year, we need to identify when changes to the MOMS need to be submitted
Cheers

[gristy]

Who ever is going to be the focal point, count me in.

Regards,
Gristy

[David Lahey]

That would be really good David and thanks for the offer, we need all interested parties agreeing to this.
I think we could actually do the survey through the clubs which should get to all interested parties.

If we limit it to people who are members of the clubs we know about, we risk missing potential riders. Are you saying yes to making a list of potential interested parties or not to make a list?

[TriCub]

David. I think we need 2 threads, one for sugested changes and the reason behind it and an other for interested people. The people one is more about what bike they have and if they intead to use it, some people like myself are not a member of a club at the moment due to my pain in the neck back. I know of a few people that have bikes already or that are building bikes that took one look at the 2011 rule book and I can't repeat their comments. They may be interested if it is made to look a bit more user freindly. We don't want all of the 800 odd people that voted in the Spanish pole though.

I'll give an example of the thing I think could happen.
1. Any BSA Bantam allowed. Reason, The models after 65 are technicaly only slightly better but still no more advanced than other pre65 makes.
2. Any Cub allowed. Reason, Newer models only had the cooling fin changes which improve reliability but are still no mre advanced than other pre65 machines.
3. Any 4 speed Bultaco's allowed. However the if the M10 model is used it must remain unchanged from the original with no deemed improved components.
Like ignitions , carbs , latter ported cylinders etc. Reason, Bultacos were common place in trials pre65 in all countries that had trial competions. The basic 4 speed motors didn't change from the early 60's through until 1968.
4. Any Triumph twin or BSA single allowed. Reason, If you are stupid enough to want ride one go for it but must use original frames. The obvious weight penelty far out weighs any technical advancement.
5. Upgrading of forks to be permitted. Must be from the pre 70 period and inline, no leading axle unless fitted as original to an allowed model.(possible a max overall lenght specified), for example Ceriani or Betor(Bultaco, Ossa ,CZ, Husky and what ever else is a copy of Ceriani) Reason, Ceriani's were available pre65 most of the above mentioned are copies and still reasonable available.

I have quite a few more thing I'm thinking of but I'm a realy slow typist and I have other stuff to do before bed.

David feel free to move anything over to the new thread.

[Twinshock200]

if we try to open a survey up to all, I too would be concerned that we would be getting a lot of uninformed feedback that would only tend to confuse the issue.

I only have one query from George's suggestions and that is about Bantams Pre 65 and Post 65, I believe the four speed gearbox only came in later than 65 and what happens if someone imports one of the lightweight Drayton Bantams from UK that I ride against every week.
I think one good point to be added to the rule book is to identify a minimum seat height which is one of the key improvemnets that is being made to "specials" by lowering the seat height.
Couldn't agree more with George's point number 4, and when you think about it everything George mentions is covered by calling Classic grade Pre 70 with a specials class within it without having endless rules and measurements to adhere to.

[gristy]

Im quite happy to do this on a open forum with Aussie Riders.David could delete any trouble as we go.One change should be seperate pre65 & twinshock in M.O.M.S.
There is some great ideas already going ,Im all fore Spanish.
Some other ideas
Limit Bashplate hieght
Limit Fork diameter
Minimum Seat size-stops narrowing frame.
Regards Gristy

[paulm]

I'm happy to build and host an online survey... once the 'questions' are agreed - It could also have a free text section for comments.

The Survey can be private i.e. inviteess only, or public. The best way to limit 'noise' is to ask interseted parties to provide thier email address and the survey link is sent to them.

Just an idea...

Cheers

Paul Mac